Search

Participants rated the attractiveness and racial typicality of male faces varying in their facial features from Afrocentric to Eurocentric and in skin tone from dark to light in two experiments. Experiment 1 provided evidence that facial features and skin tone have an interactive effect on perceptions of attractiveness and mixed-race faces are perceived as more attractive than single-race faces. Experiment 2 further confirmed that faces with medium levels of skin tone and facial features are perceived as more attractive than faces with extreme levels of these factors. Black phenotypes (combinations of dark skin tone and Afrocentric facial features) were rated as more attractive than White phenotypes (combinations of light skin tone and Eurocentric facial features); ambiguous faces (combinations of Afrocentric and Eurocentric physiognomy) with medium levels of skin tone were rated as the most attractive in Experiment 2. Perceptions of attractiveness were relatively independent of racial categorization in both experiments. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In 1898, Norman Triplett published was has been called the first experiment in social psychology and sports psychology. Claiming to demonstrate ‘the dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition,’ this oft-cited article began the serious investigation of social facilitation. This area of research now numbers in the hundreds of published works, includes the study of humans and other animals, and encompasses basic research and applied settings. But what did Triplett really find? I examine Triplett's original data and show that very little evidence existed for the social facilitation of the simple task he investigated. These analyses indicate the need to correct contemporary accounts of Triplett's work and underscore the differences in how research was evaluated at that time compared with today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined observers' impressions of hypothetical actors who succeeded or failed in the presence or absence of self-handicaps. We also investigated the moderating influence of observer individual differences related to strategic self-presentation (i.e., self-esteem and self-handicapping) on observer reactions to the self-handicapping attempts. Results indicated that low self-esteem observers, and observers who were not themselves prone to the use of self-handicaps, were most likely to be influenced by the self-handicapping attempts of others. These results indicate that an impression-management interpretation of self-handicapping must take into account observer characteristics. Results also indicated that self-handicappers were evaluated less favorably overall than were non-self-handicappers, implying that any attributional gains may be offset by generally negative impressions of those who create impediments to success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A self-attribution-reactance model of Type A behavior and medical recovery is introduced. The model proposes that Type As' bias to view themselves as causal for all outcomes makes them sensitive to events (illness, injury, or treatment) that reduce their personal control Consequently, Type As are more likely than Type Bs to respond to such events with reactant behavior (noncompliance with treatment) in order to restore their perceptions of control and freedom. In a test of the model, 32 patients being treated for running-related injuries were assessed for Type A behavior, preference for control over and involvement with treatment, and attributions for and reactions to their injury at the beginning of treatment. The physician's ratings of progress through treatment made at the conclusion of the study served as the measure of recovery. Results supported the model in that extreme Type As were more likely than moderate Type As and Type Bs to be judged as exhibiting poor recovery. Moreover, Type As judged to have made poor progress made more extreme self-attributions and were more angry about their injuries than were Type A and B patients judged to have made good progress. The implications of the findings for promoting compliance are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's views on his term as editor for the "Basic and Applied Social Psychology" periodical. He would like to make clear some of the goals and ambitions that he has for the journal. Foremost, of course, he hopes to carry on the fine tradition established by past editors who have shaped the journal into a respected publication for basic and applied research in the social sciences. Since its inception, the journal's mission has been to provide a forum for the best work on the boundary between basic and applied social psychology. That mission grows increasingly more timely. We live in an era of enormous social and technological change. Rather than neatly solving society's ills, technological advances have made more apparent the vital role that social scientists will play in tackling the major problems that face us.